extent of 50% share each. It is further submitted that all the terms and conditions

regarding the FDRs in the names of both the minor children have also been

carried out.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 reaffirms and verifies the

factum of settlement between the parties. It is verified that the terms and

conditions of the settlement in respect to the purchase of the property, FDRs etc.

have been complied with. It is reiterated that respondent No.2 has no objection

to the quashing of the abovementioned FIR against all the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the State submits that as the abovesaid FIR

arises out of a matrimonial dispute, the State has no objection to the quashing of

this FIR on the basis of a settlement arrived at between the parties.

In Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and

another 2007 (3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052, a five member Bench of this Court has

observed as under:-

“The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of
harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the
power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is used to
enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social
amity and reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of justice”.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of

Haryana, 2003(4) SCC 675 has observed that it becomes the duty of the Court

to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, it would be

in the interest of justice to quash the abovesaid FIR as no useful purpose would

be served by continuance of the present proceedings. It will merely lead to

3 of 4 23-07-2017 01:34:33 :::
CRM No.M-7179 of 2017 [4]

wastage of precious time of the court and would be an exercise in futility.